Gary Kline wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 14, 2007 at 02:34:29PM -0500, Chris wrote:
>>> On Sat, 14 Apr 2007, Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
>       [[ ... ]]
>>> In my case this included leaning to think in 'Unix', and reaching an
>>> understanding with (rather than of) regular expressions, sed, and awk.
>>> My workstation/laptop hardware does not really allow the option of
>>> building things like KDE and OpenOffice, so I upgrade basically by
>>> starting over with packages. I usually can do this in an hour or so.
>>> When I first started, I found the differences between BSDI, FreeBSD, and
>>> Linux confusing. Now mostly its more of an irritant than having to use
>>> my son's mac to watch ESPN videos.
>       I've been experimenting with system tuning to get my slower 
>       (400MHz) laptop and tower cases to run lots ffaster with X ...
>       and, obv'ly, lots slower for less important processes.  As a 
>       hard-core CLI type, I'd like to see lightweight apps like links
>       tied to a GUI version of mutt.  Or something similarly
>       lightweight where you can click on a URL and have it instantiate 
>       links.  If you must-hae 3D, then Xaw-3D will do the magic.  
>       ....
>> To me, this is where Ubuntu (I can't speak for other Linux distros) is
>> the clear winner over FreeBSD on the desktop. Ubuntu is near
>> out-of-the-box when it comes to media (audio/video/etc) of any sort.
>> Sure, there are a few  steps to get it all to gel - but once you enter a
>> few lines (or if you prefer point-n-click) - you never have to worry
>> about media working again (trust me, I used to keep a Windows box just
>> to do the things I mentioned).
>> Again - I'm talking about a desktop use. I have used Ubuntu server (both
>> i386 and sparc) and FreeBSD is still my fav. however, Ubuntu (for
>> installing LAMP) is nearly even w/FreeBSD.
>> To me, apt-get is certainly cleaner and superior to
>> portupgrade/portmanager. Perhaps someday either or will be as reliable
>> as apt-get.
>> Just my opinions of course.
>       Mine too, as far as ease-of-use goes.  Ubuntu is a different kind
>       of Linux where they say up front that Linux is only a kernel;
>       that the rest is up to the real hackers, the app folks.  My only
>       concern with Ubuntu is upgrading from my current 6.06 to 7.XX.
>       I can upgrade FBSD with one finger.  Upgrading Ubuntu isn't
>       quite push-button.  Not yet anyway.
>       The last thing:  I'll never trust my DNS server to anything
>       except the Berkeley distributions.
>       and that's my dime's worth!
>       gary

Gary -

        Not so - upgrading Ubuntu is pretty much a click. Have a look at this
URL and you'll see 2 ways to upgrade

But in a nutshell - Ubuntu (Debian) is nothing more then editing a
source file and 2 commands.  apt-get update and apt-get dist-upgrade

        As to the comment about DNS - I agree 100%

Best regards,

BOFH excuse #84:

Someone is standing on the ethernet cable, causing a kink in the cable

[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Reply via email to